From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ptrace: ptrace_attach: check PF_KTHREAD + exit_state instead of ->mm
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 06:52:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090506045241.GA26214@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090506020223.A4F1AFC328@magilla.sf.frob.com>
On 05/05, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> This changes the order of the already-traced and security checks.
> It would match the previous behavior to have the ->exit_state and ->ptrace
> checks before __ptrace_may_access(). This is a small nit, but it could
> affect whether some existing harmless usage pattern starts generating new
> access failure logging from security modules (e.g. SELinux avc denials).
Another subtle change I forgot to comment.
> I don't see any reason you can't just swap the order back as it was before.
The last patch in series, "do not use task_lock()", is the reason.
We need tasklist for writing to check (and set) ->ptrace, but we need
task_lock() to call __ptrace_may_access().
We can preserve the current behaviour, we can do get_task_mm() beforehand,
modify __ptrace_may_access() a bit, and call __ptrace_may_access() under
tasklist later (in fact, this was the very first version of this patch which
I didn't send).
But do we really care? If selinux denies to ptrace this task, can't we
return -EACESS regardless of ->ptrace?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-06 4:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-05 22:47 [PATCH 1/3] ptrace: ptrace_attach: check PF_KTHREAD + exit_state instead of ->mm Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-05 23:47 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-05 23:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-06 1:24 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 2:06 ` Roland McGrath
2009-05-06 4:56 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-06 5:03 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 7:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-06 7:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-06 2:02 ` Roland McGrath
2009-05-06 4:52 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2009-05-07 5:51 ` Roland McGrath
2009-05-09 18:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-05-10 23:11 ` Roland McGrath
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090506045241.GA26214@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.